Levels of processingCraik and Lockhart went against the idea of fixed memory stores (Multistore Model) and argued thatit is how deep a piece of information is considered that determines how deep it goes into yourmemory.Three levels: Visual (Shallow level) e.g. IS IT IN CAPITALS Auditory (intermediate level) e.g. does it rhyme Meaning (deep level) e.g. does it fit into a sentenceUnlike the MSM the LOP believes there are two types of rehearsal:1. Maintenance: Rote repetition, repeating the words as they are presented2. Elaborative: Analysing the meaning of the rehearsed materialSupporting Evidence: Craik and Tulving Aim To investigate the depts. Of processing by giving the participants tasks from one of the three levels: Visual, auditory, meaning. Method It was a repeat measure design. Three conditions. Participants were given 60 words in the form of one of the three levels. After this, unexpectedly they were given another 120 words and asked to identify to original 60 words. Results 65% recalled at the deep level 37% recalled at the intermediate level 17% recalled at the shallow level Conclusion The deeper the processing the better the memory Evaluation Lacks ecological validity and cannot be applied to everyday life. Also there's an ethical issue of deception as the participants were not told they would have to recall the words.Strengths of the levels of processing The theory is open to empirical testing and any done so far have supported the theory In school students are told to learn the meaning of you are more likely to remember it. Perception, attention and memory are connected. Traces are a result of attentional and perceptional memory processes.Weaknesses of the level of processing The Morris at el study contradicts the model. It found that information processed from sounds was best recalled whereas Craik and Tulving found those from meaning were best. Doesn't explain how deeper processing leads to longer memory. How can we measure how deep we process our information?